Drone Attacks: USA's Silent War Crimes
By Nazia Nazar
13 November, 2013
Countercurrents.org
The killing of innocent civilians by the US-operated drone attacks in Pakistan is now appearing as a serious issue of human rights violation. Amnesty International is no more reluctant to dub it as war crimes. . United Nations Secretary General’s, during his recent visit to Pakistan, also stated that the use of armed drones, like any other weapon, should be subject to long-standing rules of international law, including international humanitarian law. His statement is reflective of UN’s stance over the issue, and seems to be a reflection of its upcoming investigation report on use of drones against civilians including the issue of their legitimacy.
Recently, Pakistan’s Foreign Office spokesman said the government had prepared a case to raise the issue of US drone strikes on Pakistani territory in the United Nations, as there was no secret agreement between Pakistan and the United States on drone strikes. Earlier, Ambassador Zamir Akram, Permanent Representative of Pakistan to the UN in Geneva, had said that Pakistan, a primary target of drone attacks, had suffered a heavy loss of innocent lives apart from widespread social and economic costs. He added that these attacks caused collateral damage and violated international laws, including humanitarian and human rights laws, apart from violating Pakistan’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.
The CIA drone program targeting militants in Pakistan Tribal Areas has long been accused of causing civilian casualties, stirring anti-Americanism in Pakistan and humanitarian concern abroad. UN concerns over legitimacy of drone strikes specifically increased after a group of nations including Russia, China and Pakistan requested action against the use of covert drone strikes. A fresh area of inquiry explored by London Bureau of Investigative Journalism revealed a tragic aspect of deliberate targeting of rescuers and those attending funeral prayers by US drone strikes in Pakistan. The Bureau alleged that follow-up drones were launched when people tried to rescue victims; thus deliberate strikes were carried out on funerals and mourners. Such attacks can be clearly described as war crimes.
In fact, drone attacks raise important ethical and legal questions - questions that have long been debated by proponents and critics alike. Obama administration insists that drone strikes have resulted in few civilian casualties, but the available evidence suggests that civilian casualties from drone strikes are substantial. In July 2012, the Bureau of Investigative Journalism had reported between 2,464 and 3,145 fatalities from drone attacks in Pakistan, which included civilians. Anyhow, in keeping with desire and aspirations of the people, Pakistan’s political; military and intelligence leaderships are on the same page so far as non-acceptance of drone strikes is concerned. They have repeatedly asserted that unilateral drone strikes have proved counter-productive and result in stoking anti-American feelings on one hand and tend to create sympathy for the terrorists on the other. These attacks are in violation of international law; they undermine Pakistan’s sovereignty and tarnish the image of Armed Forces of Pakistan. For quite some time, civil liberties groups have been criticizing the drone program, which is a tantamount to waging war without declaring the war. In January 2013, a UN investigation into the legality and casualties of drone strikes has been formally launched, after a report that US drone strike in Yemen had mistakenly killed two children. It is true that for years, the CIA had a free hand in selecting targets for drone attacks, and operated under executive order.
But since President Obama assumed office, Pentagon has made intrusion in this area and the CIA has to take Pentagon into confidence for conducting attacks. This is the reason that there has been let up in drone attacks during the last few months. Indeed, the US has been successful in taking out high profile Al Qaeda leaders, but there is evidence to suggest that hundreds of innocent people have been killed, what they call, as collateral damage. Of course, Obama’s doctrine allows killing of the residents of the targeted area, as they all are considered combatants.
In Pakistan, barring a few pro-America elements the drone strikes are condemned by all strata of society, and opposition to them has become a staple of local politics and grievances against the United States. The use of drones by US is now openly criticized, whereas its repercussions are discussed at international forums. Having that said, the US must abandon its unilateral drone policy in Pakistan and pay heed to the opinion of United Nations over the issue.
Nazia Nazar is currently based in Finland and perusing her MS in Peace, Mediation and Conflict Research at Abo Akademi University.
Comments are moderated